Is there a correlation?
I
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I did not watch Trump signing the Virus Bill but Lynn did and told me the attending were standing shoulder to shoulder behind the President. What she said made me think the following:
a) They obviously have not read Trump's card urging we not touch each other and keep 6 feet distance between ourselves.
b) I understand their desire to have their picture taken because the legislation was monumental in terms of amount and the press for time but the optics sent the wrong message. I don't mean to be picky but Trump is telling us to stand 6 feet away and behind him were shoulder to shoulder attendees.
c) Perhaps they are so used to passing legislation and finding out later what is in it that they can't help themselves.
I did catch Trump's press conference later in the evening and he was his usual self which means a little rough around the edges at times, very up front and frank, upbeat and actually patient with reporters who often ask the same ones previously asked.
He is doing his best to be realistic while at the same time bucking up our nation's spirits. I continue to believe his business skills and blunt talk are well suited for the time and what we need. No wonder his polls are turning favorable and driving Democrats crazy.
Finally:
I received an interesting email from a dear friend and am posting the last 2 paragraphs which was followed by a Tom Friedman article (not posting) and then my own response. The video I referred to was funny but too raw to send broadly. Even I am capable of some self-imposed restraints.
"...Someone should point out the comfort to be had in recalling that if this crisis should be limited and disappear too soon, we will still have Climate Change, which has been occurring for 5 billion years but has been a Crisis only since Al Gore warned us of it. And if the gods were cruelly to snatch that away, we learn from the Savannah Morning News that we have another in the wings, to wit: the Maternity Mortality crisis.
On what planet does it make sense to ruin the lives and threaten the general health of, say, 75% of the population in a hopeless effort to reduce to zero the chance of fewer than 1% contracting an illness from which well over 80% of them would recover anyhow? But why speak of reason when the sky is falling?"
My response: "Without a crisis liberals would have no reason to exist because they were put on earth to bring change where there is often no need and when there is a need they overdo. Stay well and safe and above all listen to the video I just e mailed entitled "stay home." Me"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Explaining Gantz' move.
Coalition Out of Crisis: Why Gantz Threw in with Netanyahu
The beginnings of a coalition government in Israel, born of a national emergency, spell the likely end of a formidable opposition party.
After more than a year of bitter political dispute and maneuvering, Israel is about to have a coalition government. It took three elections and an unprecedented public-health crisis to get the country to this point.
Benny Gantz, a former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces and the leader of the opposition Blue and White Party, was faced with a choice this week. He could join Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or he could stick to the commitment he’d made to his supporters to bring Bibi down. As the country dealt with the coronavirus pandemic, Gantz’s continued refusal to join a coalition would likely have plunged it into the agony of a fourth election in less than two years. He chose to throw in with Netanyahu.
The price of that decision, which Gantz described as a patriotic duty at a time of national distress, was the destruction of the Blue and White. The year-old political alliance had presented the most potent challenge to Netanyahu’s grip on power in more than a decade, propelling Gantz to the brink of becoming his successor.
In the new coalition, Gantz will reportedly serve as foreign minister, with Netanyahu continuing as prime minister. The agreement calls for him to switch places with Netanyahu after 18 months, ending the latter’s run as the country’s longest-serving prime minister. But this will not be a broad unity coalition with Netanyahu’s Likud and its right-wing and religious-party allies; rather, Gantz will take only part of his faction into the new government.
Gantz took his decision in the midst of a tense and complicated squabble. The Knesset that was elected earlier this month struggled to organize itself in the absence of a governing majority for either Netanyahu or Gantz. Netanyahu and his bloc had 58 seats in the 120-seat parliament, leaving him three short of the votes he needed to continue in power. Gantz had the endorsement of 61 members, but that included the 15 seats held by the Arab Joint List, an alliance of four parties comprising Islamists, Palestinian nationalists, and Communists. A number of Knesset members from the Blue and White refused to serve in a government that depended on the votes of an alliance with the declared intent of ending Israel’s status as a Jewish state. Thus Gantz, too, lacked the votes to create a government.
A similar impasse after the two previous elections, held in April and September 2019, had led to the March 2 general election. On both sides of the political divide, there were some who were prepared to take their chances a fourth time in order to get a decisive result. But fate in the form of the coronavirus pandemic intervened.
Netanyahu, as the head of a caretaker government, embraced the crisis as only an experienced policymaker and wartime leader could. Some of his leftist critics decried the emergency measures he ordered to contain the coronavirus contagion, charging him with exploiting the crisis to bolster his political standing and to distract the country from the fact that he is still facing trial on three corruption charges. Indeed, some regarded his decision to close the courts, one result of which was to postpone the start of his trial, as an assault on democracy. But polls show that most Israelis believe he is once again demonstrating his competence in dealing with an emergency.
The incumbent prime minister knew that, though his opponent couldn’t form a government, Gantz did have the votes to effectively prevent Netanyahu from remaining in power. The critical factor was the position of Speaker of the Knesset, which has been held by a Netanyahu loyalist. A coalition of the Blue and White, smaller leftist parties, and the Joint List could have elected a new Speaker, and the Knesset could then have passed a law banning anyone under indictment from serving as prime minister. To members of the opposition, this was Gantz’s golden opportunity to take Netanyahu down. Indeed, the Blue and White — a diverse alliance including former members of the once-dominant Labor Party, a right-wing faction led by former general and Likud defense minister Moshe Ya’alon, the left-leaning Yesh Atid Party, and Gantz’s own centrist faction — was united by only one common purpose: pushing Netanyahu out the door.
Though Gantz entered politics as a much-needed fresh face a year ago, after three bruising election campaigns he is now widely seen as lacking the energy and political skills that Netanyahu possesses. Moreover, Gantz had campaigned on a promise not to form a government that would be dependent on the anti-Zionists of the Joint List, and his flirtation with that alliance in the weeks since the last election had soured voters on the Blue and White. Going to a fourth election was therefore a big risk for the party, with polls suggesting not a big or even a narrow win but in fact a decisive defeat. The electorate leans right to begin with, on top of which it was most likely to want a familiar steady hand to lead the country through the pandemic crisis. Thus Gantz came to the conclusion that joining the prime minister was the only reasonable choice.
But if he thought he could bring all of his party with him into Netanyahu’s cabinet, he was dead wrong. Leaders of the factions within the opposition regarded Gantz’s decision as a betrayal, not only of them personally but of the million Israelis who voted for them. Much of Israel’s left-leaning mainstream media, especially columnists in Haaretz, the newspaper that dubs itself Israel’s version of the New York Times, echoed this sentiment, lambasting Gantz for his cowardice and for just being too exhausted to carry on the fight.
So what becomes of the Blue and White? Some factions will stay in the opposition, and since they will have more Knesset seats than Gantz’s own faction, they will likely retain the Blue and White label. But in effect, this split spells the end of the party that had presented the most formidable challenge that Netanyahu has faced since 2009. Moreover, given that the factions disagree on most policy questions, the ability of the party, or what’s left of it, to serve as an effective opposition is questionable.
The exact terms of Gantz’s deal with Netanyahu have yet to be formalized. Gantz signaled his deal with the prime minister by having himself elected Speaker of the Knesset with Likud support — presumably only until the final bargain is sealed. In doing so, he prevented the Blue and White from wielding any remaining leverage to block the coalition. The arrangement hinges on a rotation of the office of prime minister after 18 months and on allowing Gantz’s allies to lead the ministries of defense and justice. Having one of Gantz’s allies in the latter post will ensure that, once the national coronavirus lockdown has been lifted and the courts reopened, Netanyahu’s trial will go forward.
As things stand, it appears that Netanyahu’s rule will end either with a conviction or with the prime minister’s scheduled handing over of the office to Gantz — whichever comes first. Still, many in the Likud as well as Blue and White believe that if Netanyahu is acquitted, he will find a way to renege on his deal with Gantz. Indeed, it may be that Gantz suspects the same thing.
Gantz has gone from the savior of Israel’s left-wing opposition to its bête noire. But he understood that the political stalemate could not go on: It was preventing the country from passing a budget that was needed, most urgently, to provide relief to citizens in the face of the pandemic and to shore up the economy. Dragging out the stalemate was neither rational policy nor good politics. Deciding to end it may have cost Gantz a political future, since it’s unlikely he will be able to reassemble another formidable coalition. Whether or not he really does become prime minister in September 2021, Gantz decided that destroying his party was not too high a price to pay for saving his country from further chaos in the midst of a pandemic.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Coronavirus grinds everything to a halt, even crime
By Salena Zito
CONNEAUT, Ohio — Wednesday morning, detective Taylor Cleveland called to say crime in his Ashtabula County hometown bottomed out in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. By Thursday morning, on my drive to the northeastern Lake Erie city, he called and said a big percentage of the force is home in quarantine and that he has gone from detective to acting chief of police.
Life comes at you fast in the age of the coronavirus.
Click here for the full story.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My real estate daughter sent this to me. Peter Schiff becomes popular when things are terrible.
I will not even try, nor can I, to answer each of his views but I agree America has been over-leveraged for years, has spent beyond it's means and knew, as I have consistently written, something I could not predict would eventually upset the apple cart. When it comes to Peter's view of inflation I have a somewhat different take. The flooding of money this time is to replace income that is lost by those who have been told there are no jobs so I doubt inflation will soar. The money flooding the economy will notfindits way into the stock market but in restoring our economy to some semblance of health and return to production. Time will tell if I am right.
Peter Schiff
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Below are notes on Peter Schiff's opinion of what's going on. Keep in mind that he is commonly called out for having extremist views, and he owns a gold company - so it's in his best interest to create fear of doom and inflation.
That being said, he has made remarkable investment calls that makes him legendary in the investment world. As always, it's important to gain multiple expert perspectives and then triangulate them against your own.
That being said, he has made remarkable investment calls that makes him legendary in the investment world. As always, it's important to gain multiple expert perspectives and then triangulate them against your own.
Notes:
- mostly everyone is loaded up with debt and didn't save anything over the past 10 years - living paycheck to paycheck, living above means, new car, new house, etc. massive problem for all of the creditors when they don't get the paycheck to go through to them.
- mostly everyone is loaded up with debt and didn't save anything over the past 10 years - living paycheck to paycheck, living above means, new car, new house, etc. massive problem for all of the creditors when they don't get the paycheck to go through to them.
- no evictions allowed, no reason to pay debts now. why would people pay.
- this is the biggest bubble the fed has ever had to deflate.
- we are going into a depression, not a recession. the market before coronavirus was in a bubble. the coronavirus is a missile, not a pin. it blew it up. it blew up the market.
- the fed is making it worse by printing money, and everything was going to eventually default anyways because everyone is living on borrowing, it's not sustainable. it's never been sustainable. you can't live beyond your means forever.
- stimulus bails out companies AGAIN, when they should be failing. just let them fail. taxpayers are paying for companies to hire people who shouldn't be hired and pay the executives. passing out incentive programs for population not to work now. people will get more money on unemployment than they have on a job - is that true? yes, the government is supplementing normal benefits with an extra $600/week while on unemployment. So. yes you'll make more being unemployed. Senate noticed this issue at the end as an issue when they passed it and is now trying to cap it. why would you work if you can get paid to not work by the government.
- expect 20% of people being unemployed and the fed starts to pay everyone.
- this will be a bear market that will last a decade or more. we will not make a new high in stocks. bear market in the 30s and 70s. this will be worse than that.
- inflation is going to be massive, because they can't stop it. they have no tools. this is a currency tsunami.
- all the government is doing is showering everyone with money. it doesn't work.
- recommends buying stocks in other countries, not the US, which is devaluing their currency by printing unlimited money. the dollar will lose its value. encourages gold and silver.
- funnily republicans are now socialists. the government is micromanaging businesses. shareholders are now second class citizens, employees number one. taxes have to go up on businesses and corporations. political risks are extreme.
- dollar could lose its reserve currency status. we don't pay for things, we just print money to pay. when its not reserve currency we cant just print money all the time to pay for things.
- USA lives beyond its means. that means the world subsidizes us. when the dollar crashes, all that stops.
- again, no one is going to blame the government.
- if you can borrow money at a lower rate than inflation, you make money. do it.
- where would real estate prices be at 10% interest today? the govt is manipulating the rate to 3-4%, it's all artificially inflated. the govt also guarantees the mortgage, so they lend to people who shouldn't have loans. what is the government didn't guarantee the mortgage? prices would be much lower.
- real estate prices could go up in nominal terms, but it doesn't matter, it's about the real value. inflation.
- you cant pay rent, you don't have a job, people will get roommates, rent out spare room, move back in with parents, retired people no longer can stay retired, move in with their adult children. not as much of demand for real estate because people will get smarter with their money and consolidate now due to need to.
- what about single family rental operators who are buying houses, then find tenants, and eventually tenants will buy the houses from us. those guys overestimated the ability of tenants to buy the house. private equity guys need cash now because they borrowed the money. and, they underestimated the cost of repairs and property management. their properties are not cash flowing positively. they'll have to sell their houses. rents can be under pressure if people stop paying rent. govt doesn't allow you to evict. what if they put properties on the market, it could create an inventory issue.
- own real estate where people get richer, not poorer.
- commercial real estate- everyone working at home now. commercial real estate is a huge bubble. the lower the interest rate is, the higher the value is. they created a bubble in commercial property. biggest bubble is in retail. it will get crushed.
- last year we had the highest % of companies ever doing an IPO who have no positive earnings. bubble.
- the definition of inflation is the expansion of the money supply. that is the literal definition. that's why you buy gold and silver right now. those commodities companies are so busy they can't even deliver for weeks. inflation means your cost of living will go up, but not the stock market
- if fed raised rates, everyone would default. the fed can't do it. everyone is still in debt. and the US government is debt. so the fed has no ability to fight inflation. the only tool to fight inflation is to destroy the economy even worse.
- we can't keep kicking the can down the road, we literally cant.
*Peter moved his company to Puerto Rico to enjoy the 4% tax vs the 39% tax on his companies.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Changes will come. Will they last? If so what are they likely to be?
How Epidemics Change Civilizations
Measures developed for the plagues of the 14th century are helping authorities fight the coronavirus now says Yale historian Frank Snowden.
By Jason Willick
To put the coronavirus pandemic in perspective, consider what happened when the bubonic plague struck London in 1665. The onset of the disease could be sudden, says Yale historian Frank Snowden: “You actually have people afflicted and in agony in public spaces.” Trade and commerce swiftly shut down, and “every economic activity disappeared.” The city erected hospitals to isolate the sick. “You have the burning of sulfur in the streets—bonfires to purify the air.”
Some 100,000 Londoners—close to a quarter of the population, equivalent to two million today—died. Some sufferers committed suicide by “throwing themselves into the Thames,” Mr. Snowden says. “Such was their horror at what was happening to their bodies, and the excruciating pain of the buboes”—inflamed lymph nodes—that are the classic symptom of the bubonic plague. Social order broke down as the authorities fled. “Death cart” drivers went door to door, collecting corpses for a fee and sometimes plundering the possessions of survivors.
The plague’s violent assaults on European cities in the Middle Ages and Renaissance periods created “social dislocation in a way we can’t imagine,” says Mr. Snowden, whose October 2019 book, “Epidemics in Society: From the Black Death to the Present”—a survey of infectious diseases and their social impact—is suddenly timely.
I interviewed Mr. Snowden, 73, over Skype. We’re both home in lock down, I in California and he in Rome, where he’s gone to do research in the Vatican archives. In the mid-14th century, Italy was “the most scourged place in Europe with the Black Death,” he notes. In the 21st century, it’s among the countries hardest hit by Covid-19.
Science has consigned the plague, caused by the flea- and rat-borne bacterium Yersinia pestis, to the margins of public-health concern (though it remains feared as a potential aerosolized bioweapon). Yet its legacy raises challenging questions about how the coronavirus might change the world.
For all the modern West’s biomedical prowess, some of its blunt tools against a poorly understood disease are similar to what was first attempted in the 14th century. Take quarantine. Hundreds of millions of Americans and Europeans are isolated in their homes in an effort to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
Isolation as a defense against infectious disease originated in the city-states of Venice and Florence. Italy was the center of Mediterranean trade, and the plague arrived in 1347 on commercial ships. The dominant theory at the time was “miasmatism”—the atmosphere was poisoned—perhaps by visitors’ garments—and people get sick “when they breathe that in, or absorb it through their pores,” Mr. Snowden says. “That is, there is some emanation, and it can be thought to be coming from the soil, or from the bodies” of sick people.
After plague visitations, the Venetian navy eventually began to force sailors arriving at the harbor to disembark on a nearby island, where they remained for 40 days—quaranta—a duration chosen for its biblical significance. The strategy worked when it was enforced as disease-ridden fleas died out and the sick died or recovered. Mr. Snowden notes that Americans returning from Wuhan, China, in early February were “detained on army bases for a quarantine period”—14 days rather than 40.
“We can see the roots of many aspects of modern health already in the Renaissance,” he adds. Another example is the wax “plague costume” worn by physicians. It resembled modern-day medical garb—“the protective garments that you see in the hospital for people dealing with Ebola, or this sort of space suit”—but with a long beak containing resonant herbs. They were thought to “purify the air that you were breathing in.” The costume “did, in fact, have some protective value,” Mr. Snowden says, because the wax repelled the fleas that carried the disease.
Antiplague efforts dramatically changed Europeans’ relationship to government. “The Florentines established what were called health magistrates, which are the ancestors of what today we call boards of health or departments of health,” Mr. Snowden explains. “Endowed with special legal powers,” they coordinated plague countermeasures.
The plague was more traumatic than a military assault, and the response was often warlike in its ferocity. One response was a “sanitary cordon,” or encircling of a city-state with soldiers, who didn’t allow anyone in or out. “Imagine one’s own city, and suddenly, in the morning, it’s cordoned off by the National Guard with fixed bayonets and helmets on, and orders to shoot if we cross,” Mr. Snowden says. Cordons were regularly imposed in European cities in times of plague risk, leading to terror and violence. In the 18th century, the Austrian army was “deployed to prevent bubonic plague from moving up the Balkan Peninsula and into Western Europe” by halting travelers who might be carrying it.
Yet while the plague saw power move up from villages and city-states to national capitals, the coronavirus is encouraging a devolution of authority from supranational units to the nation-state. This is most obvious in the European Union, where member states are setting their own responses. Open borders within the EU have been closed, and some countries have restricted export of medical supplies. The virus has heightened tensions between the U.S. and China, as Beijing tries to protect its image and Americans worry about access to medical supply chains.
The coronavirus is threatening “the economic and political sinews of globalization, and causing them to unravel to a certain degree,” Mr. Snowden says. He notes that “coronavirus is emphatically a disease of globalization.” The virus is striking hardest in cities that are “densely populated and linked by rapid air travel, by movements of tourists, of refugees, all kinds of businesspeople, all kinds of interlocking networks.”
The social dynamics of a pandemic are determined partly by who is most affected. Cholera, for example, “is famously associated with social and class tensions and turmoil,” Mr. Snowden says. A vicious gastrointestinal infection, it was most prevalent in crowded urban tenements with contaminated food or water. “We could pick Naples, or we could pick New York City in the 19th century,” he says. “Municipal officials, the authorities, the doctors, the priests, the middle classes, the wealthy, who live in different neighborhoods, are not succumbing to this disease.” That led to conspiracy theories about its origin, and to working-class riots.
Similarly, the bubonic plague struck India, then a British colony, in the late 19th century. The British responded by introducing Renaissance-era antiplague measures—“very draconian exercises of power and authority, but by a colonial government, over the native population,” Mr. Snowden says. “The population of India regarded this as more fearful than the plague itself” and resisted. Britain, worried that “this would be the beginning of modern Indian nationalism,” backed off the measures, which were mostly ineffective anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment